Change Your Image
chuckchuck21
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Körkarlen (1921)
Spectre of Dispair
THE PHANTOM CARRIAGE (1921) This is a dark morality play that can't help but bring thoughts of A Christmas CAROL to mind yet there is no happy ending. Directed & lead acted by Victor Sjostrom the man that inspired Ingmar Bergman to become a director it is a Swedish folktale as were many Swedish movies of the time. It revolves around the story of a relationship between a Salvation Army Worker (female) & her attempt to help an alcoholic bum who only has negative affects on the lives of those around him. It's a truly dark movie in all aspects with hard lessons for everyone. Intentions are definitely shown here but the story is about actual effects.
The FX of the carriage itself are startling & better than you'd believe for such an early movie. My copy was a Criterion Edition & I can only recommend that restoration as I've seen no other. This is a 10/10 for me. It is available in Criterion Blu-Ray also & is 107 mins long, which is the full original Swedish version. English subtitles are included. One both my wife & I are happy to own.
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011)
Good remake of a great movie
The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (American) Let me start by saying this is a review of the American version after having read the book & seen the Swedish version. The storyline in the movies remains the same essentially with differences in casting, sets & closeness to the book. Some are small such as differences in closeness to the book some are larger as in sets & casting.
The American version was correct to use Swedish settings but where they lag is in the cleanliness of the sets. This is a personal preference but I prefer the more natural gritty look & feel on the Swedish version. A notable point in the American version's favor is that it is slightly closer to the story as told in the book. The American wins by a nose here, a good example is at the end where the antagonist is dealt with. Neither the Swedish or English gets it correct & it changes your final view of both characters involved but the American is closer to the book here.
The real difference is in casting, the Swedish version has it correct in both the case of Mikael Blomkvist & Erika Berger. They look older, like people that have had a long term relationship based on a slightly hedonistic sexual lifestyle. There's a little meat on them from their long years of late night work & odd hour meals plus their casual use of alcohol over the years. It fits the printed news industry. Mikael & Erika's relationship is not based on looks. It is based on their appetite & the fact that Mikael likes strong women that don't wait for a man to initiate sex. If his sexual relations had been based on looks the Lisbeth would never have had a chance with him. The American one is Hollywood American casting. They have a gym rat body as Mikael & a thin Erika which certainly doesn't fit her notable lifestyle. It seems that Hollywood would have us believe that only thin people have good sex & that doesn't fit reality at all. It's a common problem in movies from Tinsel Town. They polish the sets & polish the bodies if at all possible.
The part that Rooney Mara took on was a courageous move on her part & she does well with it but that role was owned by Noomi Rapace as well as any role in cinema has ever been owned before. Still, the acting in the American version is very good so I'm really complaining of American tendencies in casting as versus the job done by casting in Sweden.
I know that a lot of Americans dislike hearing a foreign language for an entire movie not to mention having to read subtitles & that would qualify as a personal preference. I believe those people are missing some of the world's best cinema & would urge them to view the Swedish version as I believe it is a better experience visually. It is certainly a more dynamic performance by Noomi as Lisbeth Salander.
I gave the American version 8 stars as opposed to 10 stars for the Swedish version for the above reasons. The American is surely worth seeing & is surprising, enjoyable & a wonderful mystery / social commentary on Sweden. The book is the best of the lot as it has the pages that detail the statistics on sexual assaults on women. The story after all is about Swedish societal & government lack of care about abuse of women in Sweden & not just Lisbeth Salander's life.
The book title was more appropriate being MEN WHO HATE WOMEN, not as dramatic as TGWTDT perhaps, but the movie titles sort of muddle the storyline since they focus our attention on this one woman. I can see where people that only watch American language movies are, in my opinion, better off to watch the American one than skip it & would even say that those who watched the Swedish version only, should see Fincher's remake. I am firmly of the opinion that the Swedish is the best though.
Twisted Nerve (1968)
the tide rolls in
The story revolves around a psychotic personality that developed because of a lack of ability to deal with sexual maturity. As is normal, this personality is exceptionally manipulative & willing to play things to the end to get what they want. A great scene showing this is when he "goes to Paris" & shows Hayley's mother the note he's written to gain entrance to the house. They originally refuse him & send him back into the rain so he walks slowly away giving the guilt he knows will bother them time to work all the while appearing to be a gentleman & unwilling to put them out.
This is a good suspense movie even though the director is careful to show the rising tide of evil & doesn't give any misdirection to fool the viewer. We know what is going to happen before it happens & it doesn't really matter. The tide of evil comes on almost like a gentle ocean tide; you're in it before you notice the beach is gone.
The term special needs, doesn't really play out here, as it didn't exist at that time. Special Ed. perhaps but this doesn't involve education. It is as the book title in the movie said, 'Psychopathia Sexualis' which doesn't necessarily require what we term today special needs as a spawning ground. It's the inability to deal with sexual maturation that drives this movie. Other movies that deal with this subject are Black Swan of 2010 & perhaps the best known, Repulsion by Roman Polanski (1965) from the UK also. Twisted Nerve is about the male end of the story while the other two deal with this psychosis & dual personality on the female end. Strangely or perhaps obviously the two female centered movies deal with the opposite ends of one mental health strata that being the "does harm to others" end the other is "does harm to self". Repulsion deals with "does harm to others" while Black Swan deals with "does harm to self".
Hywel Bennett is very good here as the troubled soul & Hayley Mills comes across as a full blown young adult (with boobs). I'm going to have to check on Hywel Bennett at IMDb as I'm totally unaware of him. While no role here is complicated except for Bennett's they are all competently portrayed. Heck I like this movie better as I type. It's not an Oscar contender but it is a couple of steps above the norm. I'll say "An enjoyable ride."
Shadow of the Wolf (1992)
Great story
When I started this movie I thought OK another story from the frozen north. It sure is that, but as it moved on I found that a great tale was slowly unfolding based on the simple theme of young love & social responsibility or lack there of.
There are a number of great actors & actresses in this show & they all deliver. Some of the performances are not "to type" either. I was never a fan of Lou Diamond Phillips but he pays us all by being great in this. Jennifer Tilly, his love interest, wound up being the best character in the show (who knew?). Donald Sutherland plays a fine "Dirty Dan" here. Toshiro Mifune as the Inuit's Shaman is great in a part not written as you might expect.
The up-close look at Inuit life is wonderful because it's focused on differences but not overly long. I bought this for my wife who loves these shows & only stumbled into watching it myself. This is recommended for all ages & tastes. A surprisingly good movie, if allowed to develop & one of the best endings to a story in a long time. NO ONE WILL GUESS THE END OF THIS SHOW.
My wife & I loved "Iron Will" but this is a half star better. Broadens your knowledge of the world.
Suor Omicidi (1979)
Killer Some
This show gets great hype from its being banned when it was released & it does cover murder, drugs, self-flagellation & lesbian sex. Since it's based on actual events the ban had more to do with "leave the church alone". This is way pre-altar boy trouble.
Anita Ekberg & Paola Morra are the attractions here & the story line is just strong enough to carry the show when they are not on screen. A somewhat eerie feeling to this show. If a hint of blasphemy upsets you avoid this like the plague.
If you like Anita Ekberg unclothed this is for you. PS: Paola is better looking than Anita but there is less flesh than you might think. Blasphemy was the reason for the ban. Joe Dallesandro stars here too. Check him out in Blood for Dracula & also in Flesh for Frankenstein along with a cast of nude cuties.
Nijûshi no hitomi (1954)
against the norm
TWENTY FOUR EYES directed by Keisuke Kinoshita & starring the well known Hideko Takamine of Carmen Comes Home & When a Woman Ascends the Stairs. The story is told through the lives of Oishi played by Takamine, a teacher extraordinarily devoted to the lives of 12 of her students from the 1920's in Japan through post-war Japan & her twelve students. She has a spirit that is quiet, gentle & devoted to life which did not play well through Japan's war with China & WWII. The pace of the movie matches her spirit perfectly as she faces the trials of her students growing up & facing the highly charged conversion of her profession & country to a modern war glorifying country.
The movie was made in 1954 & faced political obstacles as you may well imagine. When a Woman Ascends the Stairs made in 1960 is a really good companion piece to this since both portray a Japanese woman's troubles facing her country's societal pressure in totally different manners. Even though the ending is as you would expect, it is powerful & moving. 4.5 out of 5 stars for this one from Kinoshita.
If you are a fan of the rapid cuts used in movies today you'll never finish this one but if you love deeply detailed story lines & a fully developed character played by a sterling actress this is one for you. Since you may be wondering, I rate When a Woman Ascends the Stairs about .1 higher than Twenty Four Eyes but really there is little to choose from here. WAWATS is a bit faster paced & deals with a darker lifestyle. My personal preferences lean that way.
The Tragedy of Macbeth (1971)
Rule of thumb
Roman Polanski's MACBETH, a movie that really doesn't seem to fit as a great Shakespearean tragedy but rather as a grab for power in a den of criminals. If it hadn't been for the large army & the inclusion of the English as a party of interest you would never know that this involved a king & a kingdom.
The lords are mainly ignorant & subject to their perceived lusts. Macbeth himself appears as a weak fool that latches onto augury as an excuse to perform his evil deeds. Having then done even one his mind breaks as he piles misjudgment on misjudgment on further augury. His wife, again a person of weak character & mental fortitude, basically piles shame on her husband's weakness only to snap suddenly and disappear into madness.
There's no hero here, no divine justice or claim to honor. A bad man seeks & obtains that which he is unfit for. He is brought down by his enemies banding together as one would expect. The language is that of Shakespeare but the characters speaking them do not seem to be. A good king is destroyed by an evil & ambitious man who is destroyed by the good king's people in defense of their homes & selves. Still, there are some great lines such as "by the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes." The storyline is Shakespearean but the movie doesn't convey it well.
It is interesting to note that the only characters in this story that get what they want are the witches. They wanted Duncan gone & whiz-bang, he is removed without them lifting a finger. I give it 3.5 Amazon stars for Polanski's direction & the wonderful dark images used throughout. Macbeth is not Hamlet but it is an OK told tale in this case. For those interested in battle scenes the personal combat at the end is striking!
The Passion of the Christ (2004)
One more voice
This is a film about subjects most people would rather avoid.
Death & religion don't lend themselves to rational discussion. Mel Gibson haters will see this as proof of his insanity & intolerance. Christians will see too much violence to be on a big screen. Humanists will see the shining truth that Christians are gullible fools willingly self deceived, but what about the movie making? The events that are being depicted here are detailed fairly well in the bible. Does the movie stay close to it's literary source as far as events & beatings & death? I say yes it does.
Someone somewhere should get credit for putting that on the screen. Your sense of appropriate levels of violence really took a beating in this story as it's told in the Bible. Go complain there. The movie is a good pictorial representation of the subject matter it claims to cover which is, the suffering & death of a man known as Jesus Christ as revealed in a book about his life.
You can claim that Jesus never existed. You can claim that these events never happened. You can claim all kinds of personal preferences but you can't claim that this is a bad movie because it didn't stay close to its literary source. You can't claim that it deliberately embellished that story. Mel Gibson certainly didn't create the story & since it wasn't intended to meet any other muster than its relationship to it's source I feel it must be highly rated as a movie & movie making.
Are you offended by the show for some reason? The show doesn't care. It wasn't made to not offend. To belittle what was done on screen here is to belittle every movie that ever stayed close to its literary source. I understand that people will have deep feelings because of their personal beliefs but it's really sad to see a movie bring out the sentiments of either all opposition is based in stupidity or illogical beliefs or I'm a Christian so it's great & no discussion of the movie, its relationship to its source or it's crafting as a movie.
The violence is deep, gritty & horrifying but the subject requires it from the source. It's not for everyone. Especially not young unformed personalities.
You know, you can discuss death, even murder, with a little child but it has to be within his speech & comprehension level. You can show him pictures of death & murder that far exceed their speech & comprehension levels & these images most assuredly exceed what children can comprehend.
I'd just like to see more individual evaluations. One's not based on the doctrines of a group, be it religious groups or any other.
Body and Soul (1981)
Body no soul
This simple story line had the potential to really shine with Jayne Kennedy as the female lead. She plays the true champions prize as the male lead chases & gets all that doesn't count. Towards the end she's still trying to teach him how to be a man.
The sad truth here though is the story appears to be nothing but what a white man would think a black boxers life is really like. By the way, I'm white. Leon the Lover is a toon & once you get past the St. Louis Assassin all the other boxers are portrayed as toons. The fight he is to lose for Mr. Big, a six year old could of written & choreographed better. The little sister puts in a good performance where she appears & it would of been better to have more of her on screen with her brother, Jayne & her mother. That doesn't mean a goody goody ending. Just less poor writing, fewer tits & more emotion based scenes. Yes I know its legendary how many breasts are available to boxer's but that was true when Rocky was made. This would of been ten times better written & directed by those folk's. I'm not asking for a change in actors or actresses they did fine with what they were given.
In the end it doesn't matter how the boxing storyline goes because this is supposed to be about peoples character & maturity. That's why so many cartoons as personalities are disappointing. If however, you are going to spend a lot of time in the ring lets not disrespect the talents of real boxers by showing this kinda s**t. Do boxers cheat? Yes! Do they cheat like all-star wrestler's? No! I could of lived with a happy love story ending, broken love story ending or everyone winds up with nothing ending. Little sis can live or die. What I can't live with is this particular story & how it's told. What a waste of good casting. Makes me angry!
Twins of Evil (1971)
Twin Winners
Twins of Evil- First off, yes this is the movie starring the Collinson Twins the first twins as Playboy Centerfolds. Yes they are beautiful & sexy. Yes any guy would sleep with either or both. The note worthy thing here is that both put in a tremendous acting performance.
Mary plays the pure virtuous sister Maria & Madeleine plays the I want to be bitten in the neck sister Frieda. As Frieda asks in the show, What if I don't want a good man? Peter Cushing is excellent as their witch hunting uncle that burns all evil to purify it. The usual group of Hammer Film supporting cast is here & as great as usual.
This was surpassingly good & told as the simplest vampire tale I have seen. Two nieces are sent to guardianship with their uncle played by Peter Cushing. He, of course, lives in the village directly below Karnstein Castle. Although the twins are impossible to tell apart by sight they do not remotely resemble each other in spirit. Good vs evil, Greedy vs content, dominant vs submissive all play here & very well from both. If you're looking for lots of nudity as in Lust for a Vampire you'll be somewhat disappointed but not totally. As I said earlier this is a straight forward & refreshing vampire story with a few surprises in story line. I am choosing to leave those out of this review & hope others have too.
It is the great sense of Evil that this movie portrays so effectively. Against that, Peter Cushing's puritanical over zealous errors play powerfully. The vivid desire to be evil (Frieda) is shown against the desire to only be contented, be pleasant & a refreshment to others (Maria). Set against the village elders misguided tyrannical rule that bears fruit non-the-less in the end. Don't miss this 3rd installment of the Karnstein Castle & Mircalla / Carmilla / Marcilla Karnstein. The pacing of the scenes is ideal & the flow of the story perfect. I found no errors here. Thank You to Hammer Films.
Gaslight (1940)
British Style
This is the original movie of this name. Most people are familiar with the 1944 American Version starring Ingrid Bergman, Charles Boyer & the screen debut of Angela Lansbury.
Released in 1940 starring Anton Walbrook & Diane Wynyard this was as classic a tale then as it is now. I prefer it slightly over the American version as the storyline is a darker more abusive affair than America's. By the way Walbrook & Wynyard were big stars then & the acting is best in the British version.
The story begins with a cruel & foul murder of an old woman knitting in her home. Young love causes a new bride to bring the husband she loves so dearly back to the house her murdered aunt had left to her years ago. No one had been willing to rent the place because of the evil crime. It stood empty & decaying for years despite it's location in Covent Gardens a very desirable location in London. The police had always been suspicious of the extensive damage done to the house & furnishings during the night of the murder & thought the old ladies rubies had disappeared with the killer.
In this show it's all about the relationship of wife, husband, maid & the gems. Not to mention the old retired detective who remembered the case from back when & thought he recognized the wife's husband. A 5 star tale & well worth buying if you like your characters dark in a murder story. The disc I got had this 1940 version on 1 side & the 1944 American version on the other. Two worlds- One price. Enjoy!
Island of Lost Souls (1932)
The Dr. is in
Island of Lost Souls- This is a 1932 classic which will be loved by the people who liked Burt Lancaster as Dr. Moreau. It's a better film all around. A young Charles Laughton plays the Dr. whose is intent on accelerating evolution. It's based on the belief that all organisms are evolving towards humankind. He works through genetic manipulation on bacteria to create humans from beasts.
The make-up is outstanding & especially on those closest to the good Doctor. A full range of reactions from the Dr's assistant played by Arthur Hohl, the rescued shipwreck victim (Richard Arlen), The Woman that was a panther (Kathleen Burke) & the beasts themselves. You even get a good sea Captain & a bad sea Captain. The eerie unreality of this environment is stronger than in the 1977 Island of Dr. Moreau starring Burt Lancaster & Michael York.
The ending is fitting, even though by today's standards, it is left to your imagination. The aim of the Dr. for the beasts is left in a sexual context although there is no sex per se in the movie. You can only wonder how these experiments would be applied to the obvious next phase of advancing human evolution by using human beings as beginning subjects.
Strangely, it not an evolutionary manifesto. The author, H G Wells, was an ardent anti-vivisectionist & wrote the story to try & stem the tide of animal experimentation. Think PETA not Darwin. Concerning Dr. Moreau's setbacks, I can think of no better phrase than the one in the movie, "The beast flesh creeps back." Unreservedly recommend the Criterion release.
Pokolenie (1955)
A different look at war.
A GENERATION- written, produced & directed by Andrzej Wadja it is the first war movie in what has become known as his war trilogy. It is a film covering Warsaw through the uprising in the Ghetto of Warsaw. This isn't based primarily on the Nazi actions of that time but is rather a straight forward look at what life was like for the populace, working by day in German held companies & resisting by night. It doesn't take a strong stomach to watch this & I believe that is by design.
Focused mainly on the daily hardships of being Polish in Poland during the occupation & the common tragedies suffered by all around Warsaw it is an entirely different condemnation of war & its effects on a local population. The next movie called KANAL focuses on the general uprising outside of the Ghetto in Warsaw. In A GENERATION you get an introduction to the Polish resistance & the Communist resistance efforts. The trilogy is finished by ASHES & DIAMONDS which covers the end of WWII.
A truly significant effort to portray Poland in WW-II & heartily recommended unless you must have high adrenaline action. This isn't anyone's propaganda. It's not propaganda at all. History on film as much as a fictional movie can be & recognized as the foundation of the Polish New Cinema School. It is a condemnation of war & its effects.
Persona (1966)
Many women or one?
Ingmar Bergman's Persona is a complete picture of Transactional Analysis in action. Is there only one woman in the movie or three? TA is an approach to psychology & psychotherapy that was created by Dr. in Eric Byrne in the late 50's. Born in Canada the Dr. worked in the USA. Bergman was obviously very well versed in Transactional Analysis concepts & brings them to the scene as only he can.
The more I look at these scenes & their construction the more impressed I am. I haven't seen every Bergman film but this is definitely the cream of the crop in my estimation. I will never tire of seeing this movie & being amazed at the care & skill put into its construction. It's a marvelous achievement & a joy to contemplate. The acting by Bibi Anderson & Liv Ullmann & cinematography (Sven Nykvist) are the equal of the directorial effort. Easily a 5 star Amazon rating for this film. Recommended to all.
I do admit to being puzzled by the montage lead-in. It really didn't seem to relate to anything in the movie & resembled the pictures used to test convicted felons for abnormal sexual responses. IMO it leads in a false direction for the film but perhaps the viewer is being tested.
The Artist (2011)
Great idea
The Artist is an almost totally silent film made by Michel Hazanavicious starring Jean Dujardin, Berenice Bejo, John Goodman, James Cromwell & Penelope Ann Miller. Set in 1927 Hollywood as the Talkies are set to replace silent films. It chronicles the troubles of a great silent film star who doesn't want to be in talkies.
The first half of the film is all a movie-goer could want. It has outrageous expressions on the faces of the silent actors in place of dialogue. Quirky & fun camera angles plus cute little comedy scenes & the regulation lovable dog that is as well trained as any other actor on the set. The beginnings of a failed marriage (done in a hilarious manner) & a budding new romance follow suit.
It's the development of these that mystified both me & my wife. You'd figure that there was a concrete reason that our star (the artist) doesn't want to be in talkies as well as a reason that no one offers him a chance later. It takes the whole movie to find out this cannot be true. The motivations & goals of this budding romance are disjointed & unfocused even at the end. Was it romance, was it friendly concern, or was it just a coincidence that stuck like glue. There is a scene early-on that leaves no doubt about what is in the woman's mind but it plays no part later on.
The second half of the movie is the man's life on the skids surrounded by people concerned for his welfare. His alcoholism & self destructive behavior, which is agonizingly drawn out to the point of boredom & greatly overacted even for a silent, gives far too much time to see the ending coming, as well as wish you were somewhere else. The second half is as bad as the first half is good. The music, costuming, sets & cinematography are worth seeing though. It's easy to see tie-ins to Singing in the Rain & A Star is Born. Truth be told they probably should have used a better tie-in to A Star is Born but that would have led to a different & hopefully better ending. You never really get inside the guys head beyond mulish pride & you see that 5 mins into the show. It starts with a grin & ends with a grin, they even had a miniature Rin Tin Tin. For a truly great silent watch SUNRISE (1928)
John Carter (2012)
What might of been, isn't
The creatures, topography & acting were great. The story had so little to do with the book A Princess of Mars, I was stunned. I was also unpleasantly surprised by the rip-off of the Return of the Jedi chase scene with the flyer. If you know nothing remotely about the character of the lead roles or the storyline then this could be rated a good show but they assassinated the characters as portrayed in the book.
My wife said to me, "Well if you just remove Edgar Rice Burroughs from the movie & the movie people had come up with this on their own wouldn't you think this was good." My reply was of course, "you mean if Edgar had never lived & they came up with the creatures, topography, alien races & the leads had no characteristics to go with them so they could write any story they wanted & assign characteristics to the roles as they see fit? It seems like that is killing Burroughs all over again & if you're going to do that then you can't advertise that it's based on a Burroughs's book or refer to A Princess of Mars at all. You've removed their hoped for initial fan base too." I'm sick of Hollywood using classic literature as a front to draw in people & writing a story that has little or nothing to do with the source material.
The show should do well with those that haven't read the books, don't know the characters as written by Burroughs & really just want effects & a wow factor. Fans of Burroughs will be turned off by this travesty of an interpretation of A Princess of Mars. I can't recommend it to Burroughs fans, myself included.
Still the acting is great, the creatures looked exactly as described in the book & the topography was too. Why they assassinated the leads characters was totally baffling except for writer or director ego. They thought they could do better & they are always wrong. Burroughs created everything good about this movie & he didn't create the flawed storyline. They particularly did a hatchet job on the Red Men of Mars & Tardos Mors & Tars Tarkus. 2 for me but maybe 8 for those that don't know the book.
Triumph des Willens (1935)
5/10 stars for movie but 10/10 for message
Come and see them all, the movers & shakers of Nazi Germany in 1934. Those you know & some you may not. This was peace time Germany & Rally's were the order of the day. There's not a lot of action in this movie but there is a lot of display. The symbols of the NSDAP, in English that's the Nationalist Social German Workers Party, in German it's Nationale Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei, are everywhere in multitudes to rival the number of attendees. This is not an easy watch & quite frankly can become boring. Even seeing the faces of the Nazi leaders can grow old though it is a great introduction to their faces. You may have to use the pause button to read the names & offices held by these men.
A glimpse of the players which you see & hear speak at the rallies- Adolph Hitler: Fuhrer Rudolph Hess: Deputy Fuhrer Paul Josef Goebbels: Reich Minister of Enlightenment & Propaganda Martin Bormann: Sec. to the Fuhrer & Head of the Party Chancellery (in order to talk to Hitler you talked to this man first) Hermann Goering: Air Marshall then Reichmarschall Werner Von Blomberg: Minister of War Victor Lutze: S. A. Chief of Staff- these are the brown shirts that pacified Germany internally. Alfred Rosenberg: Reichleiter & later Reich Minister Dr. Otto Dietrich: Reichleiter & Propaganda Press Chief Dr. Hans Frank: Reichs Minister of Justice, Gov. Gen. of Occupied Poland Dr. Franz Todt Gen. Inspector Highways & Construction, Minister Armaments & Munitions Fritz Reinhardt: State Secretary Ministry of Finance Richard-Walther Darre: Agriculture Leader & Head of Central Office Race & Resettlement Dr. Robert Ley: Reichleiter & the Head of the German Labor Front Baldur von Schirach: German Youth Leader Konstantin Kierl: Head of the German Labor Service Julius Schaub: SS Adjutant to Hitler Wilhelm Bruckner SA Adjutant to Hitler Adolph Wagner: Gauleiter of Munich
The only way to get through Triumph of the Will is to watch the people & ask, "What are they doing that millions of others haven't?" The show is all Nazi Rally documentations, one after another, the saturation of political symbols exceeds a Democratic or Republican convention. You do get an A-list of the movers & shakers in the Nazi Party & a chance to actually experience Hitler's speeches to his faithful.
It's just difficult to believe that from these fires comes the historical Germany of WW-II. The people went for it hook line & sinker having just come out of terrible inflation & what they deemed to be national embarrassment. It's not inspiring or riveting but it is informative & leaves lots of questions about that nation & its people at that time. It brings the question of how far nationalism should be accepted by people up for consideration. They sold their allegiance for a feeling of safety & well-being along with the promise of a brighter future if only they committed themselves faithfully to their leaders.
I once lived there in '71 & '72 and I can state that it's extremely difficult to associate the German actions of WW-II to my living experience in the country about 30 years later. This subject should not become an obsession with anyone in my way of thinking but it should be an awareness & a warning, I believe you'll like the directorial touches used by Leni Riefenstahl who perhaps had talent that was wasted after the war due her working for the Nazis.
La Celestina (1996)
Praising supporting actors
LA CELESTINA is a good, not great movie, from a great storyline. It involves a witch, a failing romance, a virtuous young woman & a horny knight. The knight has two servants that appear to have different opinions about the witch but turn out to be more alike than intended.
The acting is great except for Penelope (female lead) Cruz who both doesn't have enough of a role nor does she do enough. It comes with either English or Spanish language track & English subtitles. The musical soundtrack is classical & I enjoyed it a lot.
The witch & her influence on the town are as marvelously done as the music. Throughout the movie it is the servants & witch that power the story & not the lead actors. I can't rate it 3 stars but I can't rate it 4 either. The love story is kind of weakly done in my opinion.
La maschera del demonio (1960)
Queen of the Virgin / Harlot role
MASK OF Satan La Maschera del Demonio (The Mask of Satan) is the proper name of this Gothic Horror classic. (Rant) It's amazing how America is incapable of using foreign film titles & always manages to change the titles to something pointless. America didn't even get her name spelled right on the credits or the trailer (Rant over).
Mario Bava's first movie is a tremendous success in all phases of Gothic Horror. The writing, directing, cinematography & acting are a treat to watch. Barbara Steele, the Queen of the Virgin / harlot double role stars as Princess Asa Vajda / Katia Vajda. Katia is the virginal love interest of her co-star John Richardson playing Dr. Andre Gorobec but the even the secondary roles are well done.
Set in two time periods 250 years apart the evil Asa cohort of Igor Javutich, a sorcerer are killed for witchcraft but not before cursing the family members involved. What a delivery of the curse too. You'll never find a better one. Fast forward 200 years & you find Katia Vajda the picture of innocence & spitting image of Asa at home with her Father, a highly superstitious man close to death. Two Doctor's, professor Kruvajan & Dr. Gorobec are traveling thru the country & stumble on the Vajda family tomb. The rest of the movie deals with the resurrection of the two evil fiends. One by accident or fate?, one by design. Watch them begin to renew their lust for revenge & blood.
I notice I left out praise for the writers. Nickolai Gogol wrote the story the screen play was adapted from. Mario Bava contributed as a writer but the majority of the screen play was done by Ennio De Concini, Mario Seradrei & Marcelo Coscia. The quality of the short story is a historical fact. The quality of the screenplay you'll see for yourself.
Many, shocking for the time, special effects are shown here & they still appear eerie today. The American version is missing a number of minutes of this film so make sure you buy the one from Te Mario Bava Collection. It has MASK OF Satan in large print on the cover & just below it has (Mask of Satan). Necromancy & necrophilia are the subject matter here that was uncommon for the time. Familial betrayal & hatred of human blood ties rule the day, or will love, innocence & knowledge. This is a movie about a complete sellout to the powers of Satanism & evil. It's a rare & true treat that can easily be watched again & again over a lifetime. I rate it 10 of 10 in every category applicable to movie making.
I cannot say enough about Barbara Steele's performance here, her alabaster skin for which she's famous was the perfect canvas for the portrayal of harlot or virgin & her face expresses those emotions perfectly. Catch her again in Castle of Blood & Shivers the real title, called They Came from Within in America. OK, that's more rant.
Nosferatu - Phantom der Nacht (1979)
Unrelenting evil & non-stop suspense
Nosferatu: The Vampire I just got Werner Herzog's Nosferatu: The Vampyre (Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht). I'm 30 mins in & I can tell you this is a marvelous Dracula movie It is faithful to the source material (except for the closing scene)but with Herzog at the controls & color available (though little used) it is the visual embodiment of the story of Dracula. Herzog is the world's best Documentarian & you wouldn't think that would lead to great fiction. In his case it does. He directed Aguirre: The Wrath of God & Fitzcarraldo along with many others including, Signs of Life. It's images, images, images conceived in such a way as to perfectly portray his subject matter & give rise in his viewer to what is going on in that character mentally & emotionally. No one is his equal at this. Back to the movie which anyone would not believe a man whose fame grew from documentaries would be capable of in a horror story. This is Halloween the holiday in a disc folks.
Finished it & I must say what an achievement. There is not one scene of violence in the whole movie unless you call Jonathan Harker nicking his finger at the dinner table violence. The ending scene strangely does not remotely follow the book & I will dock it a full point. 1/2 for not following the book & 1/2 because to me, the ending scene is the weakest part of the story. Dracula seems to be completely unaware of when crosses (supposed to cause Dracula great pain) are in the scene. Dracula carries his coffin through a graveyard of crosses with no reaction then, when he puts his coffin down he turns & sees 2 that are 1/10 the size & cowers. When Dracula visits Lucy in her bedroom she is wearing a silver cross (extremely potent) but Dracula has no reaction again. I don't understand or forgive that. It is the first mistake of that magnitude I've seen in any of his films.
I can just hear the world's blood & gore horror crowd complaining about this atmospheric & apprehensive Dracula. The opening scene is perhaps the finest in the Horror genre. There is no blood at all to speak of. There is no crescendo after crescendo of horror. What there is is an oppressive & brooding sense of evil that is eminent, which never goes away, but carries throughout the common scenes as well as the uncommon encounters. I loved it. 8.5 out of 10 stars. Did I mention I was PO'ed about the crosses? Except for that though, the scene construction is superbly Herzog. I loved his use of music too.
XXXXXXXXXXXXX
My wife came home early to say, "Let's watch Nosferatu with Klaus. I allowed my arm to be twisted. I also came up with another dissatisfaction. It's the character of Van Helsing. I understand they were intent on showing Dracula as a sympathetic character & to have a monomaniacal foe of all that's holy would be counterproductive. The milk-toast they make of him though is just wrong. This one is not the Dr. that rides in as help in a time of trouble. He is rather the epitome of the country Dr. Many have done this story with no Van Helsing at all & I think that would have been better. Keep the character that they used but don't call him Van Helsing. I'll deduct another 1/2 point for that & make it 8 out of 10 stars after a second viewing. As my wife said after seeing it, "Aguirre was 10 out of 10. This one isn't, yet the imagery is as good & the brooding evil never leaves." Nosferatu: The Vampyre (English version) On my disc it isn't cut at all. Not even one scene. The English version comes from a dirtier source print. Snow is bad at the beginning & slowly fades for about 20-25 mins then it is gone. I didn't notice a whole lot of camera angle changes but what was evident was an overall use of slightly less light. You can really see that in the back-lighting of Count Dracula as he walks down the corridor to Jonathon Harker's room. It is noticeable throughout however. It steals the sheen off of fabrics causing it to appear less contrast was used. The ending doesn't change at all.
My wife pointed out & I agree that Shadow of the Vampire is better done but not by much. Max Schreck in that is as eerie & imposing with more latitude given for intensity. Willem Defoe against Klaus Kinski is a "can't lose" match on maniacal expression & I'll see both of these many times over the years. Imagery goes to Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht but consistency of storyline goes to Shadow of the Vampire.
Das indische Grabmal zweiter Teil - Der Tiger von Eschnapur (1921)
End to great story
Just finished watching Bob Mays' The Indian Tomb (silent 1921) & Fritz Lang's Indian Tomb (talkie 1960). These movies share the same storyline but are focused on the story in totally different, you may say opposite manners. I enjoyed both movies but tend to favor the silent because of my personal tendencies. Both casts are top rate. Both are wonderfully shot.
The storyline is that of the clash of Indian culture versus Western culture set against the construction of a tomb for an Indian Princess that the Maharajah wants constructed to house the woman he loved. The silent focuses on the Indian cultural differences & seeks to unveil all that is different & unusual to the western viewer. It is backed up by a tale of love lost & the emotional reactions he goes through. Vengeance plays a strong role in this story. There is a story twist but it's revealed very quickly.
The difficulties faced by the married English architect, his wife & the Maharaja's staff due to the total authority of the Maharaja along with the forced subservience of the palace staff is capably portrayed against the background of Indian culture as well as, one of the central themes of the silent, the Eastern mysticism of the Yogi. This mysticism is much more central in the silent than in the talkie. It is also one thing I enjoyed greatly & was surprised at the visuals accomplished in this 1921 film. The outcome is perhaps easily guessed at but the journey is not.
The Fritz Lang (1960) version is much more centered on the love story. The sets & costuming are breathtaking. Perhaps the storyline is not as professionally polished but the change this movie makes in concept is well done. Here you get the fleshing out of the love between an Englishman & an Indian Princess. The life of the princess is more openly portrayed. Debra Paget as the princess is eye-popping both as an actress & a dancer. You'll not find a better serious combination of dance & costume than Fritz shows here. It may be my lack of Paget film experience, I knew she was a raving beauty & had no idea she could dance like this. I'll give a link to one of her dances at the end of this.
I felt the Maharaja was well played in both, but once again, the silent is a stronger portrayal. The wife of the architect in the silent is of an intelligent, strong & resolute woman unusual for this 1921 time period (indeed even in 1960). The part of the Yogi is almost nonexistent in the 1960 version & that loss plays a great deal into my preference for the 1921 silent. There are many wonderful characters in both movies & I suggest that if you are interested in this kind of show then you should skip neither. The inter-cards on the silent are excellent & you don't feel you miss the conversation after reading them. As always the silent acting is more emotive to make up for the lack of talking.
Had I a great magic wand to create movies with, I would combine the themes of these two movies & create a 5 to 6 hour epic using both the revelation of Indian culture & mysticism & the expansion of the love story & dancer's life. Since you don't get this unless you watch both movies I'll give each 4 Amazon Stars with my personal preferential nod to the silent.
Black Butterflies (2011)
Talent & Madness
Black Butterflies, a picture of the life of Ingrid Jonker (Carice van Houten) in South Africa during the years of Apartheid is a movie that leaves many impressions. She was a poet & the daughter of a South African MP or representative of an electoral district. Born to privilege, her mother died in an asylum she herself would later be admitted to herself. She showed signs of mental illness all her life & spent many of her days self medicating with sex & alcohol. Yet her talent with words is well documented in her poems.
Being in conflict with her father's political beliefs she suffered an estrangement from him even when in the same room. It is well known that daughters who fail to receive the love they need from living fathers often turn to other men for love & approval. Sex, being the mechanism they try to use to obtain that that they lacked growing up, creating unstable relationships in their adult life too. They become a burden to those around them & not the first person you'd seek as a friend. Her choices as an adult leave a lot to be desired. Even her own daughter who she chose to leave motherless was used more as a crutch than an object of love & responsibility.
She lived a life of mental turmoil in a country of extreme prejudice & hated that inequality. Unable to forget or assuage the pain of her circumstances, that pain grew over the years to choke her. Yet she became the voice of those that were declared less than human by her father's beliefs. A poem of hers was read at the first democratically elected South African Congress. It begins, "The child is not dead" She took her own life after having withstood all the pain & confusion she could in this life & that will always be controversial in this world. Who is to judge how a person that retains constant contact with mental agony so that it builds in them year by year with little or no relief is to be seen? We call those that overcome such circumstances heroes & hope we are like them. Yet those that see the inequities in this world & summarily reject such things for themselves while seeing them clear enough to describe them in verse, having those things enter their mind through their eyes on a daily basis, what can we say of them. Ingrid was a load to carry if you knew her & quite frankly I'm glad I didn't. I'm no fan of suicide either but I find more sorrow than condemnation in her passing. It is for certain that the people of a South Africa free of Apartheid see her as worthy of praise.
Carice van Houten is excellent in portraying a life made of & lived by confusion. Rutger Hauer as her father & Liam Cunningham as her main love in life are strong in their roles as well. There is little in this movie that is shot as pretty or engaging scenery with the exception of the ocean. It's not intended to be pretty either in appearance or portrayal. Nudity is included but it is tastefully done. I was tempted to turn this off early on while they were displaying Ingrid's choices in life. It was a difficult watch to get through because of my dislike for her personality & life but I was glad I hung in till the end. I give it 4 out of 5 Amazon stars overall. 5 out of 5 for making me think through my reactions to it.
It only rates 6.2 at IMDb but I think a lot of people quit on this one & rated it anyway.